Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: grendelschoice Date: Jun 25, 2012 3:33pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Supremes

There isn't any chance in hell that the High Court rules in favor of the Obama Health Care Reform Act.

Best he can hope for is that parts of it are kept, whilst the "individual mandate" that's at the heart of it is struck down. (The individual mandate being a Republican idea in response to Clinton in 1993-94, and as we all know was adopted and embraced by Romney in Mass. before he decided to run for Prez. and now--in a position so absurd it would make the characters in "Wonderland" blush--promises he will undo it as his first act as Prez.)

This court is idealistically weighted (far) to the Right, and the only hope Obama has for this working in his favor is that people will see the light that things in the bill like assuring insurance co's can't deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions and allowing parents to keep kids on their plans til age 26 are GOOD things...and having them negated by the court would put them in hot water...while leaving no viable alternative to the disastrous "health care" we currently have...and maybe that will work against Romney come Nov.

But I doubt it.

Look: my personal feeling on this Obama health care bill is that it sucks b/c it essentially does nothing more than deliver 30 million new customers right to the insurance companies' doors, and with enough behind the scenes wrangling they'll eventually whittle down all the consumer protections in the bill and be back to their old tricks of milking every dime they can for their shareholders while denying coverage left and right thru miles of red tape.

The Prez. HAD he best answer in his back pocket when he originally pushed for a public option, but like every other sniveling cowardly Democrat on the Hill, he caved to Republican pressure and scare tactics and dropped it.

Public option essentially would have said: Look, if you're a hard right conservative and believe Govt. has no role in health care, great--go ahead and stay w/your private insurer charging you thru the nose for every visit to your Doc you take--for the REST of us, we get to have a Govt. plan that's affordable and won't deny coverage.

The GOP of course whined about the option--saying on the one hand that it was unfair to expect private co's to compete w/the Govt., while turning right back around and saying Govt. is too inept to provide health care. Their "arguments" were absurdly pathetic: We as Republicans believe in competition creating the best marketplace--but it's not fair if that competition is from the Govt., oh, and btw, the Govt. is too stupid to provide decent health care. Really? Then why so afraid of the public option? If the Govt. is so inept then your private insurance system has nothing to worry about, right? Guess not.

But we all know the real answer: A public option would be too good for too many people and take too many customers away from the private companies.

had Obama stuck to that private option plan he wouldn't have had to worry about the ridiculousness of a conservative SUPCO striking down a law that the likes of Gingrich, Dole, and Hatch all jumped uop and down for in 1994.

Bottom line: Stupidity in this country has gone thru the roof, and that favors a Romney election come Nov. Obama is doomed, and it's partly his fault for being such a typical democratic wimp.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: leftwinger57 Date: Jun 26, 2012 6:36pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Supremes

I will agree w/ you on most of the points you brought up. But he had to cave . Just like passing the budget the Republicans would of shut the entire gov't down.No mail,no National Parks,who knows maybe the V.A.also closes.I believe if you work and contribute to the fund and pay your share in taxes whatever the scale then you should be able to rely on the best medical care in the world for what your insurance policy dictates or for a nominal fee.How to structure the medical, pharmalogical, and insurance companies is beyond me but medicare saved my ass.Actually my knees.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mandojammer Date: Jun 26, 2012 8:52am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Supremes

grendel -

Well this old (fiscal) conservative almost agrees with you except here's where I get stuck - and it has very little to do with actual Health Care.

I don't think this falls under the auspices of the Federal government. To me this is a 10th Amendment, State's issue.

If the Feds are going to enact bullshit laws preventing people from seeking health care options and solutions across state lines, then by default (IMO), it is entirely a state's issue to address and regulate.

I suppose the rub is distribution of funding, but I think it would become a water seeks its own level equilibrium.

What I would like to see the Feds do is completely overhaul Big Pharma and the Health Insurance industries, but since these are very powerful lobbies with an ass load of our "leadership" securely in their back pockets, I have little hope of such reform.

Yet another reason why I am rooting for the complete collapse of the dollar and our economic system in my lifetime....

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Edsel Date: Jun 26, 2012 9:31am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Supremes

How will throwing hundreds of millions of people into total chaos help anyone.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mandojammer Date: Jun 26, 2012 10:49am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Supremes

We get a real chance at building it back correctly.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Edsel Date: Jun 26, 2012 11:54am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Supremes

And when you don't know what is correct, what then ?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mandojammer Date: Jun 26, 2012 12:44pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Supremes

I know what isn't correct. I'll start there.....

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Edsel Date: Jun 26, 2012 12:57pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Supremes

I find it doubtful.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: grendelschoice Date: Jun 26, 2012 10:40am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Supremes

Mando-

I almost agree with you also, and the GOP standard-bearing line of solving the insurance problem by letting people purchase across state lines would be fine IF there was any major discernible benefit from such competition. The insurance companies, however--wherever you look--, are still motivated FIRST by shareholder profit and a VERY DISTANT SECOND by the actual well being (health) of their customers, which means that no matter which plan you choose, the ins. company has every reason to look for reasons to deny or limit your coverage b/c anything they do to alleviate a medical problem for you or your family is going to cost their shareholders money.

This is why it is absurd that health care should be (IMO) a PRODUCT, when as practiced in a free market system your actual health--the most important thing you've got--is only a secondary concern.

Every major industrialized nation on this planet provides health care for its citizens. Health care affects everyone, and everyone WILL need it, despite what the GOP would have you believe otherwise, and it's not so crazy to (as they themselves decided in the 90's) to therefore make sure everyone pays into the system and doesn't let freeloaders who go to the ER every 4th of July b/c they're too stupid to let go of their M-80's in time and blow off a finger stick the rest of US with a higher premium on our insurance b/c they need their "freedom" to not carry any themselves.

The individual mandate solves this, but I guaran-fucking-tee you, as former insurance exec turned activist WENDELL POTTER (please everyone look up his interviews) has predicted...the insurance companies are licking their chops b/c they have the lobbyists in place ready to pick apart by a thousand cuts every meaningful protection against their money-sucking practices as possible, and what you'll be left with is the same old not-worth-the-paper-it's-printed-on policies that currently bleed people of their life savings whenever they suffer a catastrophic illness.

That's why in front of the TV cameras the Republicans bloviate about Obamacare but BEHIND THE SCENES the same politicians are conferring with insurance company lobbyists rooting for the court to uphold the mandate so their customer base grows by 30-40 million overnight. Then the red pens come out and it's time for reaping the big bucks.

I still don't think it will survive (parts might, the mandate probably not), but I won't shed a tear if Scalia and Co. shoot it down for political reasons...the only sad thing is that we'll be left w/the current unsustainable "health care" system we have, which is a bad, sick (literally) joke on all of us.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mandojammer Date: Jun 26, 2012 11:00am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Supremes

You've just made a pretty solid argument for why the Health Care/Insurance industry shold be nationalized. (Yeah, you just felt the Earth wobble on it's axis).

I'd leave Big Pharma out of it, because even as shitty as many of the companies are, there is still some honest level of competition putting effective and viable products out there.

I think you're right about the individual mandate being struck down and the rest being left intact. But I see that as a purely political move by SCOTUS. It takes some of the sting out of the bitch slap and allows Obama some solace. But if I am not mistaken it would be a Pyrrhic victory in that the rest of the ACA doesn't get funded properly without the provisions of the individual mandate?

We are better than this - but this is the cost of abdicating our responsibilities as an electorate to hold those douchebags in office accountable for what they do. It's easier and takes less effort to be distracted by what some Snooki bimbo on the brain vacuum TV is or isn't wearing for underwear than it is to pay attention to what is going on.

Thursday will be an interesting day indeed. I'm contemplating buying call options on health insurance companies and contributing the profits to the election campaign of a bucket of slugs......

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: grendelschoice Date: Jun 26, 2012 12:44pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The Supremes

"It's easier and takes less effort to be distracted by what some Snooki bimbo on the brain vacuum TV is or isn't wearing for underwear than it is to pay attention to what is going on."


You just nailed it.

The rise of the Tea Baggers, 30 second TV ads that sway "undecideds", and hypocrisy so blatant it SHOULD bring down candidate after candidate is instead rewarded by an electorate that votes in greater numbers for the winner of a national karaoke contest than it does for President.

Like Pogo said, "we have met the enemy, and he is us."